This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
And they Killed Gaddafi
Although the west influenced press made Gaddafi appear to be an unlikely person to unite Africans, the Western powers were not hesitating to chop him down, and finally they did. The reason for their opposition to Gaddafi showed up in high relief in Gaddafi’s extraordinary U.N. speech of Sept. 23, 2009.
I will fight till death & die a martyr: Gaddafi
Muammar al-Gaddafi, killed October 20, 2011, Sirte ‘Gaddafi had heroic last stand’
Muammar Gaddafi could have escaped and fled to another country, but he stood and fought to the last breath exactly as he’d promised, believes Jordan-based professor, Ibrahim Alloush. “What we have here is a heroic last stand and defense of Libya against a NATO-led invasion,” he said, adding that Gaddafi’s death would be a good example to thousands of his followers who reject NATO’s intervention in Libya. “The fact that he was caught wounded, drenched in blood, and was assassinated after that – this is a heavy crime against a wounded man.”
“Things should be put into perspective. This is a political fight against NATO invasion in Libya and the world, especially the Arab world, has no more doubts that what we have in Libya are not revolutionaries but NATO stooges," Alloush said. “Today is a very sad day for all the people who oppose foreign hegemony and imperialism," he concluded.
“When you nationalize your oil, when you redistribute your wealth, build your country up to be with the highest living standards in Africa, inevitably, those forces which are against that development, both internally and internationally, will oppose you. Libyan rebel factions have always been in alliance with the EU powers against Gaddafi”, the journalist said.
The basic reason is simple. Gaddafi confronted their power. He confronted the status quo of the Empire. He demanded greater power for Africa and the African Union. He demanded greater power for smaller countries in the United Nations. Gaddafi calls for investigations of past wars. He called for a new way forward that reduces the powers of any one or a few countries to dominate the world. Why then has the West done an about face after the period of good relations? Why Gaddafi’s worst fears have came to pass after a rather brief period of friendship? After Gaddafi’s most friendly embrace and adoption of Obama as his African son, why has Obama turned against Gaddafi? Why they killed him in a most disgraceful manner? It was not because Gaddafi met rebellion with force. It was not because the West had humanitarian concerns. The West has done nothing against the force used by Saudi Arabia in Bahrain and the force being used by the government in Syria against Syrians in rebellion. It was not because of a concern for democracy. In fact, Gaddafi proposed a radical form of social democracy that the Libyan government rejected. He proposed to nationalize and distribute oil revenues directly to Libyans. That placed Gaddafi at odds with members of his own state bureaucracy and with the Libyan National Oil Company. This friction between Gaddafi and the government was one of the factors that brought about a civil war. There are two reasons why the West uprooted Gaddafi. The first is oil contracts. In the negotiations in which Gaddafi gave up his nuclear program and compensated the families of bombing victims, Gaddafi held
out the prospect of oil concessions going to Western oil companies. As early as March 25, 2004, a deal was done: "A deal was signed by Shell on 25 March 2004 covering the establishment of a ‘long-term strategic partnership’ between the oil company and the local state-owned energy group. It was penned during a ground-breaking visit by the then prime minister, Tony Blair, and was followed up by meetings during July between Shell and foreign minister Baroness Symons and then the foreign secretary at the time, Jack Straw." In January of 2009, prompted by a crash to low oil prices, Gaddafi made known that he was considering nationalizing the foreign oil companies in Libya. During the oil price runup to $150 in 2008, Gaddafi had put in place infrastructure projects that depended on a high oil price. By June of 2009, Libya had renegotiated its contract with France’s leading oil company. It had already renegotiated with other international oil companies. This public threat to nationalize may have been a bargaining ploy, but combined with the renegotiated contracts, it was bound to cause the oil companies and their government friends to become somewhat uneasy about what Gaddafi’s next moves would be. Furthermore, Gaddafi had another bargaining chip, which was the prospect of utilizing Russian, Chinese and Indian oil companies. He could expand their interests in Libyan oil. In fact, during the current period of hostilities, he invited them to make up for lost production. This leads into and was connected with the second reason for the West’s desire to remove Gaddafi, which was his bid to organize African nations politically so as to have greater power as against the major powers in the world, East and West. Under new conditions, the world was unfolding another chapter in the rivalries over African resources, reminiscent of earlier colonial-imperial rivalries. In this case, the West is still interested in controlling these resources, but it is facing competition from nations from the East. Although the west influenced press made Gaddafi appear to be an unlikely person to unite Africans, the Western powers were not hesitating to chop him down, and finally they did. The reason for their opposition to Gaddafi showed up in high relief in Gaddafi’s extraordinary U.N. speech of Sept. 23, 2009.
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi Delivers a Scolding in U.N. Debut on September 23, 2009
General Assembly president Ali Abdussalam Treki, a former Libyan foreign minister, held his head in his hands. Col Gaddafi's translator broke down after 90 minutes.
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi lives up to his reputation during his first visit to America
After being introduced in the General Assembly Hall as the “leader of the revolution, the president of the African Union, the king of kings of Africa,” Colonel Qaddafi shattered protocol by giving a rambling speech that stretched for 90 minutes instead of the allotted 15. “It should not be called the Security Council, it should be called the terror council,” he added. “Permanent is something for Allah only. We are not fools to give the power of veto to great powers so they can use us and treat us as second-class citizens.” He tore up a copy of the UN charter in front of startled delegates, accused the security council of being an al-Qaida like terrorist body, He then turned his wrath on to America, Britain, France, Russia and China - the permanent members of the security council, or "terror council" as he renamed it. Their veto was tantamount to terrorism. "This is terrorism, like the terrorism of al-Qaida. Terrorism is not just al-Qaida, it takes many forms." called for George Bush and Tony Blair to be put on trial for the Iraq war, demanded $7.7tn in compensation for the ravages of colonialism on Africa, and wondered whether swine flu was a biological weapon created in a military laboratory.
Colonel Qaddafi — dressed in a brown traditional Libyan robe, embroidered vest and shirt, with a black pin of the African continent pinned to his chest — took about 17 minutes to get to the main point of his speech, which was a demand for an African seat on the Security Council.
He also emphasized that those who caused “mass murder” in Iraq be tried; defended the right of the Taliban to establish an Islamic emirate; wondered whether swine flu was cooked up in a laboratory as a weapon; and demanded a thorough investigation of the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King. And he repeated his longstanding proposal that Israel and the Palestinian territories be combined into one state called Isratine. The Security Council “is political feudalism for those who have a permanent seat,” Colonel Qaddafi said, speaking in Arabic and riffling through various documents on the hall’s green marble podium. “It should not be called the Security Council, it should be called the terror council,” he added. “Permanent is something for God only. We are not fools to give the power of veto to great powers so they can use us and treat us as second-class citizens.”
At one point in his speech, Colonel Qaddafi waved aloft a copy of the United Nations charter and seemed to tear it, saying he did not recognize the authority of the document. Speaking later in the day from the same podium, Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain said, “I stand here to reaffirm the United Nations charter, not to tear it up.”
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.